I have seen similar threads to this one in the past but not as specific to my question:

I want to take one lens, and at this point I own zero lenses. I kind of like the idea of taking just one prime (however impractical this might be, the 35mm 1.8G) but I would like to know your recommendation. Which lens would you take and why?

I'd prefer not to bring two lenses as I will need to buy both right now, and I would rather spend more money on one good lens than two okay lenses. I've seen 18-200, 18-105, 18-65, or Sigma 18-50 recommendations in previous threads, with none significantly outweighing the others. Maybe that's just how it is?

I really like 35mm lenses on full frame cameras, but the body and lenses are outside my budget right now. I plan to shoot lots of street style photos, insides of churches and pubs, people, and landscapes. I like night photos as well.

I just like the field of view better then that of the 35mm on a crop sensor body. 24mm actually is the closest you will get to the field of view of a 35mm on full frame.

If you are on a budget, seriously consider a used 18-55 VRII. It can be found cheap and it´s sharp and contrasty when stopped down to f5,6 or f8. Bring a table tripod along as well. (both camera and lens are lightweights so a table tripod with mini ballhead will work fine and fit in a somewhat large coat pocket)

If you only take one lens then forget fast and just take the 18-105 (ca. 160mm equivalent on DX so pretty long for your uses) otherwise you will always be regretting either not having anything long enough or not being wide enough (35 on DX is NOT wide, especially for interiors). You are visiting some lovely countries - don't waste the trip trying to do it all on one prime.

You will absolutely need a tripod as with a slow lens you will need longer shutter speeds indoors but that in itself shouldn't be detrimental to your photography (unless people keep walking in front of your setup

For night, indoor, street, landscapes.... you need a versatile lens,,, the best option IMHO is the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 which seems to be phenomenal even wide open but I do not know if it will hit the shelves before your trip.

The Tamron 17-50 is excellent but indeed slow to focus (at least the version I own). I would not recommended it as a single lens solution. The 18-200 VR or 18-300 VR are my favorite one lens does it all options. If you want slightly better IQ, the 16-85VR is a good choice, but the range has its limitations (better on the wide end, but not enough reach).

I looked a little at the 16-85 and am worried at the slower f stop. I'm not necessarily a fan of single lens solutions; I just don't have the coin to buy several lenses all at once. Instead, I was hoping to find a lens that would be versatile enough for my trip and that would fit nicely in my hopefully growing lens collection afterward.

Eventually, for the 18-200 range, I'd like to have 3 or 4 lenses where I take 2 at any given time. I do like minimizing weight, though it bugs me when I necessarily have to sacrifice quality to do so.

A touch of realism here Caleb, you are not going to suddenly find a gem that combines width for interiors, with reach, with speed for low light .... and if you did it would cost an arm and a leg. So everything is a compromise, you need adequate to good quality in an 'all-in-one' lens, or 2 lenses, or drop your requirements for reach (which IMHO you will regret touring those countries (I'm from the UK and have lived and worked in both the NL and Austria so know the typical subjects you will find). Decide which route you want to go and choose the lens from those suggested that meets your criteria.

You are looking for a lens that does low light, does not require a tripod, is great for landscapes, cities and people and so on .... there is no perfect solution to that conundrum.

The only other option is maybe e.g. a 70-300 VR (Nikon or Tamron) and a MF wide, which is of course a 2 lens solution but will be cheaper than 2 x modern AF lenses but still give you the IQ you are looking for, though I still think the 18-105 or as suggested the 16-85 or 18-200 are the nearest you will find to your perfect lens. If you buy used then sell on your return you will not lose much, if anything, and can then start building the kit you want.

I used the Tamron 17-50/2.8 for 2 years, it is a fine lens and I shot people events with it, very sharp with slightly muted colours (easily fixed in PP), the Sigma is very similar both in IQ and build quality. As with all lenses be very aware of sample variation, both of those models have been shown to have inconsistent QC..

Tripod - for both landscapes and night shots it is an essential item so again if you don't want to take even a light tripod then you will be compromising somewhere along the way. Personally I'd take one and leave it in your room until you are sure you need it.

I travelled through Mexico with a D5100 and a 35mm f/1.8. Loved it. This is a small, super-lightweight combo that packs a lot of image quality punch. No, it is not wide enough for architecture or landscapes, but if you don't mind stitching panoramas it can work well.

If it doesn´t have to be a single lens, consider a 20mm prime and the Tokina 50-135 f2,8. Both will be plenty fast and still small. Both can stay in a lens collection afterwards as long as you stay with DX (the Tokina).

If you ever consider stepping up to FX consider a 18mm or 20mm prime and the Nikon AF 35-70 f2,8D or Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8. Both are still relatively compact but fast lenses.

Just make sure your camera has the screwdriver type AF motor because most reliable budget lenses need it.

Personally I like to travel light as well.

Light is approx. 14 lbs of camera gear (1 body, 3 lenses, 1 flash) in a single small´ish bag. Then again, I never hike more then 20 miles a day with that amount of gear at the ready

I just seriously dislike leaving home without a macro lens or a remote flash.

D5100 does not have AF motor... most older Nikon prime lens do not AF with it.
D5100 cannot even meter with AI lens... that means those cheap and cheerful AI/AIS lens are not quite practical.
D5100 is a DX body, since wider lens are generally more expensive so if you don't buy DX lens then you are spending too much money and waste the wider view.

Tamron 17-50 (non VC, since VC version has way too much field curvature ), Nikon 16-85 or 18-105 are quite good for travel. Actually the cheap 18-55 is very good too, it is just slow. To me, VR is more useful than f2.8 for travel use.

I actually think you should buy the duel lens kit in the first place

Tripod is very important. You can, like frogfish said, leave it in the hotel when you are sure you are not going to need it. I carry one with me most of the time....sometimes put it in lockers in train/subway stations ..

To shoot inside of pubs, and UK churches (I was there last summer,) you need a fast lens. You need the versatility of a zoom and you also need speed. Your choice boils down to either a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 or a used Nikon 17-55mm f2.8. I have used the latter on my D5100 and it performed flawlessly. I have no doubt the Sigma would also, and it has "VR." (OS.)

A Benro Travel Angel 0269 series tripod will hold the D5100 very well, and folds down to about 16 inches.

I'll be traveling to Seattle/Portland/Vancouver in the coming weeks and will also be taking my D5100. Lens choices will be the 35 1.8 and the 18-200 VRI. I purchased the 18-200 specifically for this trip so that I will not have to change lenses when out and about.

The 35 will be for anything inside (breweries, bars, museums).
The 18-200 will be for everything else (landscapes, street, possibly whale watching).

Total out of pocket for both lenses was ~$400. I picked up the 35 new on Rakuten via Adorama for $175 - $70 in reward points. The 18-200 came from B&H as an 8+ for $290. After a good cleaning the 18-200 is now a 9/9+.

pb300 wrote:
Total out of pocket for both lenses was ~$400. I picked up the 35 new on Rakuten via Adorama for $175 - $70 in reward points. The 18-200 came from B&H as an 8+ for $290. After a good cleaning the 18-200 is now a 9/9+.

Sounds like you scored a steal.

I always said that if I could only have one lens for my DX camera it would be an 18-200.

However, I must have got a bad copy on my second one (it was the latest version) because my first 28-300 just blew it away in image quality.

My standard walk around lens and most used on trips with My D7000 is the sigma 17-70/f2.8-4 C (35mm equivalent to a roughly 26-105mm on DX). The newest rendition is possibly one of the best options around. Outstanding close up lens too.
Both images done with same lens.

these images were taken with the previous version and the C is even better.